Categories
Global Veterans News

Canadian Armed Forces program helps injured members and veterans – Edmonton

[ad_1]

A contingent of Canadian Armed Forces members and veterans are in Edmonton preparing for an international sporting event aimed at changing their lives.

Thirty-seven members of the CAF’s “Soldier On” program are participating in a five-day training camp for the Warrior Games.

Members of the program will compete in eleven events ranging from sitting volleyball to rowing.

READ MORE: Charity golf event raising funds, awareness for veterans

“It’s a big world stage. It’s not just single. You talk to everyone about the Warrior Games. So just being a participant, soaking it in, talking to other people, seeing where they are in their journey of healing,” Soldier On member Sabrina Mulford said.

The games and the Solider On program are about more than current and retired military members competing in sport. The primary goal is to help participants recover from injury and illness.

Story continues below advertisement

“It affords an opportunity for these brave women and men who’ve been injured during their careers to put the maple leaf on their shoulders again, to serve Canada and be part of that team that might have been lost after their injury or illness,” Soldier On senior manager Joe Kiraly said.


Click to play video: 'Dispatchers Adventure Ride is raising awareness about PTSD'







Dispatchers Adventure Ride is raising awareness about PTSD


Dispatchers Adventure Ride is raising awareness about PTSD – Jun 9, 2022

“Warrior Games has given me that light at the end of the tunnel because the last year has been really really difficult,” Mulford said.

Mulford had to adjust to life outside of the Canadian Armed Forces. She was a military member for 24 years before retiring last year.

“For me, the military is a little different. We’re a different society, and we try to mingle back in, and that’s hard when you spent 24 years in the military coming back into civilian life again,” she said.

Story continues below advertisement

READ MORE: Heartwarming reunion as Canadian soldier surprises family during Leafs puck drop

“To come to a program like Soldier On and experience shared bonds among folks who have been down similar roads in their lives, see how they’ve coped and share strategies, it’s a really powerful experience, and it can have life-changing results,” Kiraly said.

Mulford has already experienced the benefits of the program. She will be competing in rowing and power-lifting at the Warrior Games.

“I kind of lavish in the experience of meeting new people from different parts of the world and the country because we all live different lives, [but] we all have a common goal when it comes to the Warrior Games.”

The games will take place at the ESPN Wild World of Sports Complex in Orlando, Florida, August 19 to 28.

© 2022 Global News, a division of Corus Entertainment Inc.



[ad_2]

Source link

Categories
Global Veterans News

It’s time to wean Europe off American security

[ad_1]

It’s time to wean Europe off American security

Putin’s aggression should be a wakeup call for Europe to shoulder their own defense burden. US policy should encourage it.

At NATO’s Madrid summit, President Biden announced new US deployments to Europe as part of NATO’s effort to deter Russia following Putin’s war of aggression against Ukraine. A larger American presence in Europe might make for good NATO PR but carrying even more of our wealthy allies’ defense burden is strategic malpractice.

Biden’s new deployments aren’t even his first this year. In February, the administration sent 20,000 additional troops to Europe, raising American forces in the region to over 100,000. New deployments include a forward headquarters for the US Army’s 5th Corps in Poland, America’s first ever permanent deployment in Eastern Europe. The United States will also increase its rotational deployments to NATO’s eastern flank in Romania and the Baltic states. Further west, America will deploy two new F-35 squadrons to the UK, two additional destroyers to Spain, and air defense forces to Germany and Italy.

Lost amid the summit’s triumphal displays of transatlantic solidarity were any serious questions about why allies need additional US forces to protect them when they collectively boast almost twelve times Russia’s GDP, outspend Moscow two-to-five-fold on defense, and have twice Russia’s active-duty. Putin’s missteps in his brutal war in Ukraine only underscore this—if Russia can’t take Kharkiv, let alone Kyiv, Warsaw and Berlin are not next.

The US’ heavy military presence in Europe gives our wealthy allies little incentive to improve their military capabilities and plenty to keep free riding off US security. NATO figures project that in 2022 only seven of the alliance’s twenty-eight European members will meet their agreed-upon targets of spending two percent of their GDP on defense. And while it’s encouraging that Germany pledged 100 billion euros in new military spending this year, the gesture merely gets Berlin back to the bare minimum to have a capable force. The Bundeswehr’s abysmal readiness for years on end has been a slow-burning national scandal that the German’s are only now addressing. More European countries would take important steps like Germany’s for their militaries if US policy did not undermine the political will to do so.

It’s hard to blame European leaders for taking advantage of American presidents’ willingness to underwrite their security. Russia’s invasion should be both a wakeup call for Europe to rearm and a reminder for Washington that it’s no longer 1949. Despite Russia’s aggression, our European allies enjoy their most favorable balance of power against Moscow since the collapse of the USSR. Russia’s poor performance in Ukraine and Europe’s advantages make it the perfect opportunity for the US to begin an orderly drawdown of its European forces.

Doubling down on US deployments in Europe sends the opposite message, encouraging NATO Europe’s military weakness and diverting limited American resources from bigger priorities. At a time when the United States faces record debt and out-of-control inflation, sending more troops to Europe trades in a “foreign policy for the middle class” for more US taxpayer subsidies of European welfare states. As the Asia-Pacific becomes more important for US interests as Europe becomes less, every formation America deploys through NATO is one unavailable to deter China in the Pacific.

Europe and America are both better off when each focus on their respective principal security challenges: the Europeans on Russia and the United States on China. Token European naval patrols in the Pacific don’t meaningfully alter the regional balance of power but materially reduce NATO’s local capability against Russia. At the same time, more American troops in Europe kicks the US “pivot to Asia” further down the road from actually materializing.

The United States can better advance its interests while benefitting its allies by supporting European strategic autonomy. America should abandon its past opposition to European efforts to create parallel security institutions alongside NATO through the EU.

EU structures, such as the European Defence Agency and its Common Security and Defence Policy can be complimentary to NATO while offering Europe the ability to act collectively on regional security issues when vital American interests aren’t involved or when the United States is unable to assist.

The US can also encourage further cooperation among regional European alliances, such as the Nordic Defence Cooperation organization in Scandinavia or the Visegrad Group in Eastern and Central Europe, which maintains an EU-commanded battlegroup.

Within NATO, the United States can support greater European leadership by gradually reducing its role in the alliance to logistical support, providing technical assistance to European members seeking to upgrade their own capabilities, and finally nominating NATO’s first European Supreme Allied Commander.

Russia’s weakness and Europe’s relative strength offer both the US and our transatlantic allies the chance to become more sustainably secure. Doing so requires a clear strategic vision from American leadership—burden-shifting over burden-sharing. Gradually drawing down US deployments from Europe can ensure an orderly transition for our allies as they develop their capabilities. Delaying the US withdrawal from Europe until America is forced to by a crisis only sets up Europe and the United States for defeat.

Take a look back at the history of NATO and the future of the alliance.

[ad_2]

Source link

Categories
Global Veterans News

Single Judge Application; Wait v. Wilkie, 33 Vet.App. (2020); The Court held in Wait v. Wilkie, 33 Vet.App. 8, 17 (2020), that “[t]o establish the presence of a disability . . . there must be competent evidence specific to the claimant tending to show that his or her impairment rises to a level to affect earning capacity, which may include showing manifestations of a similar severity, frequency, and duration as those VA has determined by regulation would cause impaired earning capacity in an average person.”;

[ad_1]

Designated for electronic publication only
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR VETERANS CLAIMS
No. 19-9062
ANDREW M. THORPE, APPELLANT,
V.
DENIS MCDONOUGH,
SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, APPELLEE.
Before TOTH, Judge.
MEMORANDUM DECISION
Note: Pursuant to U.S. Vet. App. R. 30(a), this action may not be cited as precedent.
TOTH, Judge: Retired Army veteran Andrew M. Thorpe appeals a September 2019 Board decision, which determined that new and material evidence had not been received to reopen a service-connection claim for a left shoulder disorder.1 He argues that (1) the Board’s new and material evidence determination was clearly erroneous, and (2) the Board erred in relying on an inadequate medical examination. For the reasons set forth below, the Court affirms.
I. BACKGROUND
Mr. Thorpe served from 1986 to 2007. During his last year of service, he filed a VA compensation claim for a “shoulder injury” that he said occurred in July 2000. R. at 1871. In 2008, the regional office (RO) denied service connection for both a left and right shoulder disorder. The RO decision listed in the “evidence” section the veteran’s service treatment records (STRs) from November 3, 1985, until April 18, 2006. R. at 1770. And based on these records, the RO concluded that there was no evidence of a current left shoulder disability. Mr. Thorpe did not pursue an appeal and the 2008 decision became final.
1 The Board also reopened and remanded a claim for service connection for a left knee disorder and remanded a claim for service connection for bilateral pes planus. Because remands are not final decisions, the

[ad_2]

Source link

Categories
Global Veterans News

Single Judge Application; pain; functional loss; If pain causes functional loss, it “must be rated at the same level as if that functional loss were caused by some other factor.” Mitchell v. Shinseki, 25 Vet.App. 32, 37, (2011); For an examination to adequately capture functional loss, the examiner must opine whether pain could significantly limit functional ability and, if feasible, portray that opinion “‘in terms of the degree of additional range-of-motion loss due to pain on use or during flare-ups.’” Sharp, 29 Vet.App. at 32 (quoting Deluca v. Brown, 8 Vet.App. 202, 206 (1995));

[ad_1]

Designated for electronic publication only
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR VETERANS CLAIMS
No. 19-6885
BILLY MOSLEY, APPELLANT,
V.
DENIS MCDONOUGH,
SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, APPELLEE.
Before TOTH, Judge.
MEMORANDUM DECISION
Note: Pursuant to U.S. Vet. App. R. 30(a),
this action may not be cited as precedent.
TOTH, Judge: Navy veteran Billy Mosley seeks a rating higher than 10% for his back
disability, for the period from January 22, 2010, to October 19, 2017, and ratings higher than 10%
for a left and a right knee disability, for the period since January 22, 2010.* When rating joint
disabilities, the Board should rely on VA examinations that consider whether and to what extent
pain, or other factors listed in 38 C.F.R. §§ 4.40 and 4.45, limit a veteran’s ability to function.
Sharp v. Shulkin, 29 Vet.App. 26, 32 (2017). Mr. Mosley argues that a May 2010 VA exam is
inadequate to properly rate his functional loss and that the Board’s assessment of functional loss is
not supported by an adequate statement of reasons or bases.
For the back disability, the Secretary concedes that the Board didn’t explain why it relied
on the May 2010 exam to rate the veteran’s back disability for the period between January 2010
and October 2017, as that exam did not adequately portray the extent of the veteran’s functional
loss for that period. The Court accepts this concession and remands as to that matter. With respect

The veteran raises no argument as to the Board’s denial of a rating in excess of 40% for his back disability
for the period since October 19, 2017, so any appeal as to

[ad_2]

Source link

Categories
Global Veterans News

Panel Application; educational benefits; 38 C.F.R. § 21.9635(o); Carr, 961 F.3d at 173; the Federal Circuit interpreted the phrase “may receive” as referring only to an initial calculation of a veteran’s entitlement and not to the amount of benefits that a person may, in fact, receive; It then concluded that the statute does not preclude an individual, who has accumulated and used a total of 48 months of educational benefits from a combination of chapters, from receiving an extension in benefits until the end of a semester. Carr, 961 F.3d at 173;

[ad_1]

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR VETERANS CLAIMS
No. 16-3438
SAMANTHA E. CARR, APPELLANT,
V.
DENIS MCDONOUGH,
SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, APPELLEE.
ROBERT M. CARR, INTERVENOR
On Remand from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
(Decided February 19, 2021)
Samantha E. Carr, pro se.
Meghan Flanz, Interim General Counsel; Mary Ann Flynn, Chief Counsel; Selket N. Cottle,
Deputy Chief Counsel; and Sara W. Fusina, Senior Appellate Attorney, all of Washington, D.C.,
were on the brief for the appellee.
Robert M. Carr, pro se, as intervenor.
Before BARTLEY, Chief Judge, and PIETSCH and TOTH, Judges.

TOTH, Judge: Air Force veteran Robert Carr transferred a portion of his 48 months of
education benefits to his daughter, Samantha Carr, so that she could pay for her college tuition.
After she used these benefits to pay for two semesters, Ms. Carr began the fall 2013 semester with
a single day of entitlement remaining. Invoking 38 C.F.R. § 21.9635(o), she sought to extend her
benefits until the end of the semester, but the Board determined that subsection (y) of that
regulation prohibited a transferee from receiving an extension—even though a veteran in the same
situation would be entitled to one.
Ms. Carr brought this appeal to challenge the validity of § 21.9635(y), arguing that it is
inconsistent with its authorizing statute, 38 U.S.C. § 3319. We didn’t reach that question in our
initial decision because we concluded that 38 U.S.C. § 3695 prevented anyone—veteran or
dependent—from receiving benefits in excess of 48 months. The Federal Circuit reversed our
decision, however, interpreting the phrase “may receive” as referring not to the amount of benefits
a person may receive,

[ad_2]

Source link